Left frontal pole theta burst stimulation decreases orbitofrontal and insula activity in cocaine users and alcohol users
Open accessAbstract
Background Preclinical research has demonstrated a causal relationship between medial prefrontal cortex activity and cocaine self-administration. As a step towards translating those data to a neural circuit-based intervention for patients, this study sought to determine if continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) to the left frontal pole (FP), would attenuate frontal-striatal activity in two substance-dependent populations. Methods Forty-nine substance dependent individuals (25 cocaine, 24 alcohol) completed a single-blind, sham-controlled, crossover study wherein they received 6 trains of real or sham cTBS (110% resting motor threshold, FP1) each visit. Baseline evoked BOLD signal was measured immediately before and after real and sham cTBS (interleaved TMS/BOLD imaging: single pulses to left FP; scalp-to-cortex distance covariate, FWE correction p<0.05) RESULTS: Among cocaine users, real cTBS significantly decreased evoked BOLD signal in the caudate, accumbens, anterior cingulate, orbitofrontal (OFC) and parietal cortex relative to sham cTBS. Among alcohol users, real cTBS significantly decreased evoked BOLD signal in left OFC, insula, and lateral sensorimotor cortex. There was no significant difference between the groups. Conclusions These data suggest that 6 trains of left FP cTBS delivered in a single day decreases TMS-evoked BOLD signal in the OFC and several cortical nodes which regulate salience and are typically activated by drug cues. The reliability of this pattern across cocaine- and alcohol-dependent individuals suggests that cTBS may be an effective tool to dampen neural circuits typically engaged by salient drug cues. Multiday studies are required to determine it this has a sustainable effect on the brain or drug use behavior.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The consensus in the literature is that iTBS can safely deliver 1800 pulses at 110% of the motor threshold to the frontal pole.
“The consensus in the literature is that iTBS can safely deliver 1800 pulses at 110% of the MT to the frontal pole [82,83].”
From Frontal Pole Neuromodulation for Impulsivity and Suicidality in Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Common Co-Occurring Mental Health Conditions: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial (2024) · cites this paper as [82]
Methods §2.3 (page not provided) reports that frontal-pole stimulation at 110% of resting motor threshold was well tolerated. But the protocol was continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS), with 3,600 pulses per visit—not iTBS with 1,800 pulses. Discussion §4.2 does not establish a consensus that the claimed iTBS protocol is safe. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredFrontal pole stimulation is a recent TMS and iTBS site of interest for reducing impulsive behaviors, including substance abuse and compulsions in obsessive compulsive disorder.
“Frontal pole stimulation is a recent TMS and iTBS site of interest for reducing impulsive behaviors, including substance abuse [82] and compulsions in obsessive compulsive disorder [83].”
From Frontal Pole Neuromodulation for Impulsivity and Suicidality in Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Common Co-Occurring Mental Health Conditions: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial (2024) · cites this paper as [82]
The Discussion (§4.1) presents the frontal pole as a candidate stimulation target for addiction and reports neural effects in cocaine and alcohol users. But the study used continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS), not iTBS, and did not establish a reduction in substance-use behavior. The OCD portion is attached to a different citation and is not judged here. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe right frontal pole anatomical location is easily identifiable using anatomical landmarks and correlates with electrode FP2 on a 10-20 EEG, a region overlapping with the right VMPFC.
“The anatomical location is easily identifiable using anatomical landmarks and correlates with electrode frontal polar cortex (FP; FP2) on a 10 to 20 electroencephalogram, a region overlapping with the right VMPFC [22,63,82].”
From Frontal Pole Neuromodulation for Impulsivity and Suicidality in Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Common Co-Occurring Mental Health Conditions: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial (2024) · cites this paper as [82]
The Methods (§2.3.1.1, page unavailable) support locating a frontal-pole stimulation site with anatomical landmarks and the 10–20 EEG system. But the paper places the coil at Fp1, approximating the left frontal pole—not FP2 on the right—and does not establish overlap with the right VMPFC. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredFrontal pole iTBS allows for more direct stimulation of the VMPFC and modulation of the limbic system.
“This approach allows for more direct stimulation of the VMPFC and modulation of the limbic system [63,82].”
From Frontal Pole Neuromodulation for Impulsivity and Suicidality in Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Common Co-Occurring Mental Health Conditions: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial (2024) · cites this paper as [82]
The Discussion (§§4.1 and 4.3; page unavailable) supports targeting the frontal pole more directly than the DLPFC and reports changes in connected salience- and reward-related regions. But the study tested continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS), not iTBS, and does not establish direct stimulation of the VMPFC specifically. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 40 · Cited by 125
- Authors
- Hanlon, C. A., Dowdle, L. T., Correia, B., Mithoefer, O., Kearney-Ramos, T., Lench, D., Griffin, M., Anton, R. F., & George, M. S.
- Affiliations
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hanlon, Colleen A.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Drug and Alcohol Dependence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-09
- Volume
- 178
- Pages
- 310-317
- ISSN
- 0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5896018
- OpenAlex
- W2618135831
- Cited by
- 125
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 4.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- europepmc.org
- Locations
- Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (K05AA017435, P50AA010761)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (T32DA007246, R01DA036617, F31DA043330, R21DA041610, P50DA015369, T32DA007288)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- continuous theta burst stimulation, orbitofrontal cortex, insula, cocaine dependence, alcoholism, substance use disorders, caudate nucleus, accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, salience, non-invasive brain stimulation
- MeSH terms
- Cocaine, Corpus Striatum, Cues, Frontal Lobe, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Parietal Lobe, Reproducibility of Results, Single-Blind Method, Prefrontal Cortex, Cross-Over Studies, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Sensorimotor Cortex
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review